Molecular classification and biomarkers of outcome with immunotherapy in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: analyses of the CASPIAN phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: We explored potential predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treated with durvalumab (D) + tremelimumab (T) + etoposide-platinum (EP), D + EP, or EP in the randomized phase 3 CASPIAN trial. METHODS: 805 treatment-naïve patients with ES-SCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to receive D + T + EP, D + EP, or EP. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Patients were required to provide an archived tumor tissue block (or ≥ 15 newly cut unstained slides) at screening, if these samples existed. After assessment for programmed cell death ligand-1 expression and tissue tumor mutational burden, residual tissue was used for additional molecular profiling including by RNA sequencing and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In 182 patients with transcriptional molecular subtyping, OS with D ± T + EP was numerically highest in the SCLC-inflamed subtype (n = 10, median 24.0 months). Patients derived benefit from immunotherapy across subtypes; thus, additional biomarkers were investigated. OS benefit with D ± T + EP versus EP was greater with high versus low CD8A expression/CD8 cell density by immunohistochemistry, but with no additional benefit with D + T + EP versus D + EP. OS benefit with D + T + EP versus D + EP was associated with high expression of CD4 (median 25.9 vs. 11.4 months) and antigen-presenting and processing machinery (25.9 vs. 14.6 months) and MHC I and II (23.6 vs. 17.3 months) gene signatures, and with higher MHC I expression by immunohistochemistry. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the tumor microenvironment is important in mediating better outcomes with D ± T + EP in ES-SCLC, with canonical immune markers associated with hypothesized immunotherapy mechanisms of action defining patient subsets that respond to D ± T. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872.

Atezolizumab Plus Carboplatin and Etoposide in Patients with Untreated Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Interim Results of the MAURIS Phase IIIb Trial.

BACKGROUND: MAURIS is an Italian multicenter, open-label, phase IIIb ongoing trial, aiming at evaluating the safety and effectiveness of atezolizumab + carboplatin/etoposide in patients with newly diagnosed, extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). The primary objective is the safety evaluation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received atezolizumab + carboplatin/etoposide Q3W for 4-6 cycles in the induction phase, followed by atezolizumab maintenance Q3W. We presented the interim analysis on safety (referring to the induction phase) and clinical effectiveness, in all patients (N = 154) and in subgroups that received ≤3 (N = 23), 4 (N = 43), and 5-6 cycles (N = 89) of induction. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 10.5 months, 139 patients (90.3%) discontinued treatment. Serious adverse events occurred in 29.9% of patients overall, and the rate was lower in patients with 5-6 cycles (19.1%) than in those with 4 (34.9%) or ≤3 (63.6%) cycles. Immune-mediated adverse events were reported in 14.9%, 15.7%, 11.6%, and 18.2% of patients, overall and by subgroup, respectively. The median overall survival and progression-free survival were 10.7 and 5.5 months, respectively. Overall, 111 patients (71.6%) had a tumor response. CONCLUSIONS: Interim results provide further evidences about safety and efficacy profile of atezolizumab + carboplatin/etoposide treatment in a ES-SCLC patient population closer to that observed in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudract No. 2019-001146-17, NCT04028050.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Mesothelioma: Pleural, Version 1.2024.

Mesothelioma is a rare cancer that originates from the mesothelial surfaces of the pleura and other sites, and is estimated to occur in approximately 3,500 people in the United States annually. Pleural mesothelioma is the most common type and represents approximately 85% of these cases. The NCCN Guidelines for Mesothelioma: Pleural provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with pleural mesothelioma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight significant updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Mesothelioma: Pleural, including revised guidance on disease classification and systemic therapy options.

First-line cemiplimab monotherapy and continued cemiplimab beyond progression plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 50% or more (EMPOWER-Lung 1): 35-month follow-up from a mutlicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cemiplimab provided significant survival benefit to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of at least 50% and no actionable biomarkers at 1-year follow-up. In this exploratory analysis, we provide outcomes after 35 months' follow-up and the effect of adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at the time of disease progression. METHODS: EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540. FINDINGS: Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months' follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1-31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5-16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2-8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3-6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42-0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1-9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3-18·7). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals INTERPRETATION: At 35 months' follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

Tepotinib in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations.

BACKGROUND: A splice-site mutation that results in a loss of transcription of exon 14 in the oncogenic driver MET occurs in 3 to 4% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, in this patient population. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 study, we administered tepotinib (at a dose of 500 mg) once daily in patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC with a confirmed MET exon 14 skipping mutation. The primary end point was the objective response by independent review among patients who had undergone at least 9 months of follow-up. The response was also analyzed according to whether the presence of a MET exon 14 skipping mutation was detected on liquid biopsy or tissue biopsy. RESULTS: As of January 1, 2020, a total of 152 patients had received tepotinib, and 99 patients had been followed for at least 9 months. The response rate by independent review was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI], 36 to 57), with a median duration of response of 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.2 to could not be estimated) in the combined-biopsy group. The response rate was 48% (95% CI, 36 to 61) among 66 patients in the liquid-biopsy group and 50% (95% CI, 37 to 63) among 60 patients in the tissue-biopsy group; 27 patients had positive results according to both methods. The investigator-assessed response rate was 56% (95% CI, 45 to 66) and was similar regardless of the previous therapy received for advanced or metastatic disease. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher that were considered by investigators to be related to tepotinib therapy were reported in 28% of the patients, including peripheral edema in 7%. Adverse events led to permanent discontinuation of tepotinib in 11% of the patients. A molecular response, as measured in circulating free DNA, was observed in 67% of the patients with matched liquid-biopsy samples at baseline and during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced NSCLC with a confirmed MET exon 14 skipping mutation, the use of tepotinib was associated with a partial response in approximately half the patients. Peripheral edema was the main toxic effect of grade 3 or higher. (Funded by Merck [Darmstadt, Germany]; VISION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02864992.).

Targeted Toxicities: Protocols for Monitoring the Adverse Events of Targeted Therapies Used in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Targeted therapies have revolutionized the treatment for many patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Multiple new oral targeted therapies have been approved in the last decade; however, their overall efficacy may be reduced by poor adherence, treatment interruptions, or dose reductions due to adverse events. Most institutions lack standard monitoring protocols for toxicities from these targeted agents. This review describes important adverse events observed in clinical trials and reported by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for both currently approved and upcoming promising therapies in the treatment of NSCLC. These agents cause a range of toxicities, including dermatologic, gastroenteric, pulmonary, and cardiac toxicities. This review proposes protocols for routine monitoring of these adverse events, both prior to initiation of therapy and while on treatment.

Prognostic role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and EPSILoN score in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with first-line chemo-immunotherapy.

Background: Clinical and laboratory biomarkers in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) receiving chemo-immunotherapy (CIT) are still poorly explored. Materials & methods: All consecutive aNSCLC patients who received at least one cycle of first-line CIT were enrolled. The impact of several clinical and laboratory biomarkers on outcomes was evaluated through Cox proportional hazard models. Results: Higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was shown to be an independent prognostic biomarker of both worse progression-free survival and worse overall survival. The EPSILoN score was able to divide patients into three different prognostic groups, with a median overall survival of 73.2, 45.6 and 8.6 months for the favorable, intermediate and poor groups, respectively. Conclusion: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and EPSILoN score were shown to have a prognostic value in aNSCLC patients treated with CIT.

Patients affected by inoperable lung cancer, due to great extension or to the presence of metastases, are currently treated with intravenous drugs that act on immune system activation alone or in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment. The characteristics of these patients (both their medical history and their blood exams) need to be studied to find out if some of them can help clinicians to predict if they will benefit from the combination of immunotherapy with chemotherapy. The authors collected the data of patients with advanced lung cancer treated in their hospital and found out that a value calculated from their blood exams, collected before the start of treatment and a combination of values named EPSILoN score (which considers patients' clinical condition, their history of tobacco smoking, the presence of metastases in the liver and two blood exam parameters, namely the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and LDH level) can predict how their disease will evolve during first-line treatment with chemotherapy in combination with immunotherapy.

Gemcitabine with or without ramucirumab as second-line treatment for malignant pleural mesothelioma (RAMES): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a preclinical rationale for inhibiting angiogenesis in mesothelioma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the anti-VEGFR-2 antibody ramucirumab combined with gemcitabine in patients with pretreated malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: RAMES was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial done at 26 hospitals in Italy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and histologically proven malignant pleural mesothelioma progressing during or after first-line treatment with pemetrexed plus platinum. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks plus either intravenous placebo (gemcitabine plus placebo group) or ramucirumab 10 mg/kg (gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group) on day 1 every 3 weeks, until tumour progression or unacceptable toxicity. Central randomisation was done according to a minimisation algorithm method, associated with a random element using the following stratification factors: ECOG performance status, age, histology, and first-line time-to-progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured from the date of randomisation to the date of death from any cause. Efficacy analyses were assessed in all patients who had been correctly randomised and received their allocated treatment, and safety analyses were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03560973, and with EudraCT, 2016-001132-36. FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2016, and July 30, 2018, of 165 patients enrolled 161 were correctly assigned and received either gemcitabine plus placebo (n=81) or gemcitabine plus ramucirumab (n=80). At database lock (March 8, 2020), with a median follow-up of 21·9 months (IQR 17·7-28·5), overall survival was longer in the ramucirumab group (HR 0·71, 70% CI 0·59-0·85; p=0·028). Median overall survival was 13·8 months (70% CI 12·7-14·4) in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and 7·5 months (6·9-8·9) in the gemcitabine plus placebo group. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 35 (44%) of 80 patients in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and 24 (30%) of 81 in the gemcitabine plus placebo group. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (16 [20%] for gemcitabine plus ramucirumab vs ten [12%] for gemcitabine plus placebo) and hypertension (five [6%] vs none). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in five (6%) in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and in four (5%) patients in the gemcitabine plus placebo group; the most common was thromboembolism (three [4%] for gemcitabine plus ramucirumab vs two [2%] for gemcitabine plus placebo). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Ramucirumab plus gemcitabine significantly improved overall survival after first-line standard chemotherapy, with a favourable safety profile. This combination could be a new option in this setting. FUNDING: Eli Lilly Italy. TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide alone in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): updated results from a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line durvalumab plus etoposide with either cisplatin or carboplatin (platinum-etoposide) showed a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide alone in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in the CASPIAN study. Here we report updated results, including the primary analysis for overall survival with durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide alone. METHODS: CASPIAN is an ongoing, open-label, sponsor-blind, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial at 209 cancer treatment centres in 23 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older (20 years in Japan) and had treatment-naive, histologically or cytologically documented ES-SCLC, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) in blocks of six, stratified by planned platinum, using an interactive voice-response or web-response system to receive intravenous durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide, durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide, or platinum-etoposide alone. In all groups, patients received etoposide 80-100 mg/m2 on days 1-3 of each cycle with investigator's choice of either carboplatin area under the curve 5-6 mg/mL/min or cisplatin 75-80 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle. Patients in the platinum-etoposide group received up to six cycles of platinum-etoposide every 3 weeks and optional prophylactic cranial irradiation (investigator's discretion). Patients in the immunotherapy groups received four cycles of platinum-etoposide plus durvalumab 1500 mg with or without tremelimumab 75 mg every 3 weeks followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg every 4 weeks. The two primary endpoints were overall survival for durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide and for durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043872. FINDINGS: Between March 27, 2017, and May 29, 2018, 972 patients were screened and 805 were randomly assigned (268 to durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide, 268 to durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide, and 269 to platinum-etoposide). As of Jan 27, 2020, the median follow-up was 25·1 months (IQR 22·3-27·9). Durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide was not associated with a significant improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-1·00]; p=0·045); median overall survival was 10·4 months (95% CI 9·6-12·0) versus 10·5 months (9·3-11·2). Durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide showed sustained improvement in overall survival versus platinum-etoposide (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·62-0·91]; nominal p=0·0032); median overall survival was 12·9 months (95% CI 11·3-14·7) versus 10·5 months (9·3-11·2). The most common any-cause grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (85 [32%] of 266 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group, 64 [24%] of 265 patients in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group, and 88 [33%] of 266 patients in the platinum-etoposide group) and anaemia (34 [13%], 24 [9%], and 48 [18%]). Any-cause serious adverse events were reported in 121 (45%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group, 85 (32%) in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group, and 97 (36%) in the platinum-etoposide group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 12 (5%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide group (death, febrile neutropenia, and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each]; enterocolitis, general physical health deterioration and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, pneumonia, pneumonitis and hepatitis, respiratory failure, and sudden death [n=1 each]), six (2%) patients in the durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide group (cardiac arrest, dehydration, hepatotoxicity, interstitial lung disease, pancytopenia, and sepsis [n=1 each]), and two (1%) in the platinum-etoposide group (pancytopenia and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]). INTERPRETATION: First-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide showed sustained overall survival improvement versus platinum-etoposide but the addition of tremelimumab to durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide did not significantly improve outcomes versus platinum-etoposide. These results support the use of durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide as a new standard of care for the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Pembrolizumab plus Chemotherapy in Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: First-line therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that lacks targetable mutations is platinum-based chemotherapy. Among patients with a tumor proportion score for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) of 50% or greater, pembrolizumab has replaced cytotoxic chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of choice. The addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in significantly higher rates of response and longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone in a phase 2 trial. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) 616 patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK mutations who had received no previous treatment for metastatic disease to receive pemetrexed and a platinum-based drug plus either 200 mg of pembrolizumab or placebo every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by pembrolizumab or placebo for up to a total of 35 cycles plus pemetrexed maintenance therapy. Crossover to pembrolizumab monotherapy was permitted among the patients in the placebo-combination group who had verified disease progression. The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, as assessed by blinded, independent central radiologic review. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 10.5 months, the estimated rate of overall survival at 12 months was 69.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.1 to 73.8) in the pembrolizumab-combination group versus 49.4% (95% CI, 42.1 to 56.2) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for death, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.64; P<0.001). Improvement in overall survival was seen across all PD-L1 categories that were evaluated. Median progression-free survival was 8.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 9.2) in the pembrolizumab-combination group and 4.9 months (95% CI, 4.7 to 5.5) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.64; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 67.2% of the patients in the pembrolizumab-combination group and in 65.8% of those in the placebo-combination group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with previously untreated metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC without EGFR or ALK mutations, the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy of pemetrexed and a platinum-based drug resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Merck; KEYNOTE-189 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02578680 .).

Myeloid cell heterogeneity in lung cancer: implication for immunotherapy.

Lung is a specialized tissue where metastases from primary lung tumors takeoff and those originating from extra-pulmonary sites land. One commonality characterizing these processes is the supportive role exerted by myeloid cells, particularly neutrophils, whose recruitment is facilitated in this tissue microenvironment. Indeed, neutrophils have important part in the pathophysiology of this organ and the key mechanisms regulating neutrophil expansion and recruitment during infection can be co-opted by tumor cells to promote growth and metastasis. Although neutrophils dominate the myeloid landscape of lung cancer other populations including macrophages, dendritic cells, mast cells, basophils and eosinophils contribute to the complexity of lung cancer TME. In this review, we discuss the origin and significance of myeloid cells heterogeneity in lung cancer, which translates not only in a different frequency of immune populations but it encompasses state of activation, morphology, localization and mutual interactions. The relevance of such heterogeneity is considered in the context of tumor growth and response to immunotherapy.

Thymoma and thymic carcinoma in children and adolescents: The EXPeRT/PARTNER diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations.

Thymic tumors are epithelial tumors arising from the anterior mediastinum and constitute 0.2-1.5% of all adult malignancies but are exceptional in pediatric population. Thymic epithelial tumors (TETs) encompass a variety of histologic subtypes associated with different clinical outcomes. Due to its rarity in children, TETs' management requires a multidisciplinary approach. However, prognosis remains still poor, especially among patients with thymic carcinoma. This study presents the internationally recognized recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of thymic tumors in children and adolescents, established by the European Cooperative Study Group for Pediatric Rare Tumors (EXPeRT) group within the EU-funded project Paediatric Rare Tumours Network - European Registry (PARTNER).

Patient-reported outcomes with durvalumab by PD-L1 expression and prior chemoradiotherapy-related variables in unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.

Aim: We retrospectively investigated the impact of tumor PD-L1 expression and prior chemoradiotherapy (CRT)-related variables on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from PACIFIC. Patients & methods: PACIFIC was a Phase III study of durvalumab versus placebo after CRT in patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. If available, pre-CRT tumor tissue was tested for PD-L1 tumor-cell expression, scored at prespecified (25%) and post-hoc (1%) cut-offs. PROs were assessed using EORTC QLQ C30/-LC13. Results: Similar to the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, most PROs remained stable over time across PD-L1 and CRT subgroups, with few clinically relevant differences between treatment arms. Time to deterioration was generally similar to the ITT population. Conclusion: Neither PD-L1 expression nor prior CRT-related variables influenced PROs with durvalumab therapy. Clinical trial registration: NCT02125461 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Patient-reported outcomes following pembrolizumab or placebo plus pemetrexed and platinum in patients with previously untreated, metastatic, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-189): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum led to superior overall survival and progression-free survival, and a higher proportion of patients with a confirmed complete or partial response over placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum in the KEYNOTE-189 study. We aimed to evaluate prespecified exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients in KEYNOTE-189. METHODS: In the multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-189 study done at 126 cancer centres in 16 countries, eligible patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without sensitising EGFR or ALK alterations, measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg) or saline placebo every 3 weeks for up to 2 years (35 cycles); all patients received four cycles of intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) with carboplatin (5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (75 mg/m2; investigator's choice) every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by pemetrexed maintenance therapy every 3 weeks. Permuted block randomisation (block size six) was done with an interactive voice-response system and stratified by PD-L1 expression, choice of platinum, and smoking status. Patients, investigators, and other study personnel were unaware of treatment assignment. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Lung Cancer 13 (QLQ-LC13) were administered at cycles 1-5, every three cycles thereafter during year 1, and every four cycles during years 2-3. The primary endpoints (overall survival and progression-free survival) have been published previously. Key PRO endpoints were change from baseline to week 12 (during chemotherapy) and week 21 (following chemotherapy) in QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL) score, and time to deterioration in cough, chest pain, or dyspnoea. PROs were analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study medication and who completed at least one PRO assessment, and the results are provided with two-sided, nominal p values. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02578680. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2016, and March 6, 2017, 616 patients were enrolled; median follow-up was 10·5 months (range 0·2-20·4) as of data cutoff on Nov 8, 2017. 402 (99%) of 405 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum group and 200 (99%) of 202 patients in the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum-treated group completed at least one PRO assessment. At baseline, 359 (89%) of 402 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum group and 180 (90%) of 200 in the placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum group were compliant with QLQ-C30; at week 12, 319 (90%) of 354 and 149 (89%) of 167 patients were compliant, respectively; and at week 21, 249 (76%) of 326 and 91 (64%) of 143 patients were compliant, respectively. From baseline to week 12, GHS/QOL scores were maintained with both pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum (least-squares mean change: 1·0 point [95% CI -1·3 to 3·2] increase) and placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (-2·6 points [-5·8 to 0·5] decrease; between-group difference: 3·6 points [-0·1 to 7·2]; p=0·053). From baseline to week 21, GHS/QOL scores were better maintained with pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum (least-squares mean change: 1·3 points [95% CI -1·2 to 3·6] increase) than with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (-4·0 points [-7·7 to -0·3] decrease; between-group difference: 5·3 points [1·1 to 9·5]; p=0·014). Median time to deterioration in cough, chest pain, or dyspnoea was not reached (95% CI 10·2 months to not reached) with pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum, and was 7·0 months (4·8 months to not reached) with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum (hazard ratio 0·81 [95% CI 0·60-1·09], p=0·16). INTERPRETATION: The addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy maintained GHS/QOL, with improved GHS/QOL scores at week 21 in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group compared with the placebo plus chemotherapy group. These data further support use of pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

COVID-19 in patients with thoracic malignancies (TERAVOLT): first results of an international, registry-based, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Early reports on patients with cancer and COVID-19 have suggested a high mortality rate compared with the general population. Patients with thoracic malignancies are thought to be particularly susceptible to COVID-19 given their older age, smoking habits, and pre-existing cardiopulmonary comorbidities, in addition to cancer treatments. We aimed to study the effect of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on patients with thoracic malignancies. METHODS: The Thoracic Cancers International COVID-19 Collaboration (TERAVOLT) registry is a multicentre observational study composed of a cross-sectional component and a longitudinal cohort component. Eligibility criteria were the presence of any thoracic cancer (non-small-cell lung cancer [NSCLC], small-cell lung cancer, mesothelioma, thymic epithelial tumours, and other pulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms) and a COVID-19 diagnosis, either laboratory confirmed with RT-PCR, suspected with symptoms and contacts, or radiologically suspected cases with lung imaging features consistent with COVID-19 pneumonia and symptoms. Patients of any age, sex, histology, or stage were considered eligible, including those in active treatment and clinical follow-up. Clinical data were extracted from medical records of consecutive patients from Jan 1, 2020, and will be collected until the end of pandemic declared by WHO. Data on demographics, oncological history and comorbidities, COVID-19 diagnosis, and course of illness and clinical outcomes were collected. Associations between demographic or clinical characteristics and outcomes were measured with odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs using univariable and multivariable logistic regression, with sex, age, smoking status, hypertension, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease included in multivariable analysis. This is a preliminary analysis of the first 200 patients. The registry continues to accept new sites and patient data. FINDINGS: Between March 26 and April 12, 2020, 200 patients with COVID-19 and thoracic cancers from eight countries were identified and included in the TERAVOLT registry; median age was 68·0 years (61·8-75·0) and the majority had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 (142 [72%] of 196 patients), were current or former smokers (159 [81%] of 196), had non-small-cell lung cancer (151 [76%] of 200), and were on therapy at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis (147 [74%] of 199), with 112 (57%) of 197 on first-line treatment. 152 (76%) patients were hospitalised and 66 (33%) died. 13 (10%) of 134 patients who met criteria for ICU admission were admitted to ICU; the remaining 121 were hospitalised, but were not admitted to ICU. Univariable analyses revealed that being older than 65 years (OR 1·88, 95% 1·00-3·62), being a current or former smoker (4·24, 1·70-12·95), receiving treatment with chemotherapy alone (2·54, 1·09-6·11), and the presence of any comorbidities (2·65, 1·09-7·46) were associated with increased risk of death. However, in multivariable analysis, only smoking history (OR 3·18, 95% CI 1·11-9·06) was associated with increased risk of death. INTERPRETATION: With an ongoing global pandemic of COVID-19, our data suggest high mortality and low admission to intensive care in patients with thoracic cancer. Whether mortality could be reduced with treatment in intensive care remains to be determined. With improved cancer therapeutic options, access to intensive care should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting based on cancer specific mortality and patients' preference. FUNDING: None.

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer without tumor PD-L1 expression: A pooled analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes over chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. This study pooled data from 3 randomized controlled trials to evaluate outcomes with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC negative for PD-L1 (ie, a tumor proportion score < 1%). METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from KEYNOTE-021 cohort G (nonsquamous; NCT02039674), KEYNOTE-189 (nonsquamous; NCT02578680 and NCT03950674), and KEYNOTE-407 (squamous; NCT02775435). Treatment comprised pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (pemetrexed and platinum for nonsquamous histology and carboplatin and paclitaxel/nab-paclitaxel for squamous histology) or chemotherapy alone. Responses were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by blinded, independent, central review. No α was assigned to this descriptive, exploratory analysis. RESULTS: Four hundred forty-four of the 1328 patients (33.4%) who were enrolled across the 3 trials had PD-L1-negative tumors (256 on pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy [nonsquamous, n = 155; squamous, n = 94; other, n = 7] and 188 on chemotherapy alone [nonsquamous, n = 83; squamous, n = 99; other, n = 6]). The median time from randomization to the data cutoff was 28.0 months (range, 14.7-55.4 months). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improved overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.79) and progression-free survival (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83) over chemotherapy. Sixteen patients in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy arm completed 2 years of treatment; the objective response rate was 87.5% (95% CI, 61.7%-98.4%), and the 3-year OS rate was 100%. Adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 99.2% of the patients who received pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy and by 98.9% of the patients who received chemotherapy alone, with grade 3 or higher AEs occurring in 71.4% and 72.0%, respectively; immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions were experienced by 29.0% and 12.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated response and survival improvements with manageable safety in comparison with chemotherapy alone in PD-L1-negative advanced/metastatic NSCLC, and it is a standard-of-care first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression. LAY SUMMARY: Some tumors produce a protein called programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which interacts with the body's immune system and prevents an immune response against cancer. Antibody therapies such as pembrolizumab block interactions between tumor PD-L1 and the immune system and enable an immune response. Used alone, pembrolizumab provides benefit for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors that produce PD-L1. However, when it is combined with chemotherapy, which can stimulate anticancer immune responses, pembrolizumab provides a benefit, regardless of tumor PD-L1 production. This article shows that among patients with NSCLC whose tumors produce no PD-L1, outcomes are better with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in comparison with chemotherapy alone.

Osimertinib or Platinum-Pemetrexed in EGFR T790M-Positive Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that is selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and T790M resistance mutations in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. The efficacy of osimertinib as compared with platinum-based therapy plus pemetrexed in such patients is unknown. METHODS: In this randomized, international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we assigned 419 patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, who had disease progression after first-line EGFR-TKI therapy, in a 2:1 ratio to receive either oral osimertinib (at a dose of 80 mg once daily) or intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg per square meter of body-surface area) plus either carboplatin (target area under the curve, 5 [AUC5]) or cisplatin (75 mg per square meter) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles; maintenance pemetrexed was allowed. In all the patients, disease had progressed during receipt of first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. RESULTS: The median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (10.1 months vs. 4.4 months; hazard ratio; 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.41; P<0.001). The objective response rate was significantly better with osimertinib (71%; 95% CI, 65 to 76) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (31%; 95% CI, 24 to 40) (odds ratio for objective response, 5.39; 95% CI, 3.47 to 8.48; P<0.001). Among 144 patients with metastases to the central nervous system (CNS), the median duration of progression-free survival was longer among patients receiving osimertinib than among those receiving platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (8.5 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.49). The proportion of patients with adverse events of grade 3 or higher was lower with osimertinib (23%) than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Osimertinib had significantly greater efficacy than platinum therapy plus pemetrexed in patients with T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (including those with CNS metastases) in whom disease had progressed during first-line EGFR-TKI therapy. (Funded by AstraZeneca; AURA3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02151981 .).

Impact of performance status on non-small-cell lung cancer patients with a PD-L1 tumour proportion score ≥50% treated with front-line pembrolizumab.

Objectives: We retrospectively analysed patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring high PD-L1 expression (>50%) and treated with front-line pembrolizumab, comparing outcomes of patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 2 to those with PS 0-1.Methods: Data were collected by 16 participating centres. All patients with NSCLC and high PD-L1, treated with first-line pembrolizumab were included. We collected medical data from patient files, pathology and laboratory reports. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, PS, and tumour characteristics were reported. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate (RR) were calculated.Results: 302 patients were included, 246 with PS 0-1, 56 with PS 2. RR was 72% among patients with PS 0-1 compared to 45% with PS2 (odds ratio (OR) 0.31 (95% CI: 0.17-0.57), p < .001). Median PFS was 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.9-5.1) among patients with PS2 and 11.3 months (95% CI: 8.5-14.4) among those with PS 0-1. Median OS was 7.8 months (95% CI: 2.5-10.7) in the PS2 group, not reached in the PS 0-1 group. PS 2 remained predictive of poor outcomes in multivariate analysis.Conclusion: PS 2 is a strong independent predictor of poor response and survival in NSCLC patients with high PD-L1, treated with front-line pembrolizumab. Prospective randomised trials comparing immunotherapy to chemotherapy in this population would be welcome.

Hyperprogressive Disease upon Immune Checkpoint Blockade: Focus on Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Describe the controversial aspects of hyperprogressive disease (HPD) definition, mechanisms, and biomarkers. RECENT FINDINGS: Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) demonstrated a survival benefit in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), an acceleration of tumor growth during ICI, defined as HPD, was reported in ~ 13-26% of NSCLC patients and correlated with worse survival compared with conventional progression. Different criteria have been used for HPD definition. The main limitation for the use of tumor growth rate and tumor growth kinetics variations is its inapplicability for patients without a pre-baseline imaging or progressing on non-measurable lesions. On the contrary, time to treatment failure and clinical criteria (i.e., worsening of performance status, presence of new lesions, or metastatic spread to different sites) can be useful in the above-mentioned settings but do not consent an assessment of tumor growth before ICI initiation. Several mechanisms of HPD have been proposed so far, involving both adaptive and innate immunity or based on cell-autonomous signals of cancer growth triggered by ICI. The characterization of HPD biomarkers and the identification and validation on large series of one or more mechanistic explanations for the HPD phenomenon are of paramount significance to avoid detrimental immunotherapy in a subgroup of patients and exploit novel therapeutic targets for future immunotherapy combinations. HPD occur in a subgroup of NSCLC patients treated with ICI. Several definitions and mechanisms have been proposed and a consensus on HPD criteria and biological bases is currently lacking.